tv Outnumbered FOX News April 5, 2017 9:00am-10:01am PDT
whfight back fastts, with tums smoothies. it starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue. and neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪ tum -tum -tum -tum smoothies! only from tums >> jon: we're back in an hour. "outnumbered" starts now. >> we begin with breaking news and a live picture now. actually this was just moments ago. then we'll roll live when we can and pick it back up. that's because seconds ago the king of jordan, abdullah, arrived at the white house. you can see president trump waiting outside the vehicle with the first lady as well. this meeting is so important, because this is the king who can deliver consensus on middle east peace. he's meeting with our president today. a couple things will happen now. they're going to meet. they're going to have a dual news conference as is customary when a leader comes and visits this way. we are also expecting in the next little while, once they get into the white house, they'll go into the oval office. we'll see that traditional
picture that we always see. sometimes with this particular president some comment to both the guest and to the media as he's wont to do. for right now it's quiet. of course he starts talking as i say that. but this, of course, king abdullah, his beautiful wife ronia, a fashion icon around the world, and does so much humanitarian work along the world with her son. the family of jordan's royalty arriving at the white house. when we get the inside look inside the oval office we'll bring it to you. this fox news alert, the situation is growing tougher by the second as the drumbeat grows louder for former national security advisor susan rice to testify before congress. she continues to deny leaking information after she requested to see the unmasked names of americans scooped up in federal snooping on then candidate
donald trump being on the list. this is "outnumbered." i'm harris faulkner. here sewed, sandra smith, meghan mccain, fox news legal and political analyst, ebony williams, and the opinion page editor for the washington times charlie hurt is here. charlie, i saw you perk up as that was going on. the president likes to have a westward there. let's get started with the news now. susan rice is denying that politics played a role, that it was done in the interest of national security, but many republicans don't buy that. they're ramping up their calls for rice to testify under oath. in a letter to the house and senate intelligence committees, three former members of the transition team say we demand that ms. rice be called before
congress in order to discuss her motivations for these actions. if true, her behavior appears negligent at best, criminal at worst. mitch mcconnell backs an investigation. watch. >> i've asked the intelligence committee to conduct a bipartisan investigation of this whole episode. they will conduct it. hopefully at the end we'll find out what happened and they'll issue a report, i hope on a bipartisan basis, and anything related to susan rice, or any of these other suggestions, will be handled by the intelligence committee. >> harris: at the white house, press secretary sean spicer yesterday with strong reaction to rice's denials, telling the media rice seemed to contradict her previous comments on pbs when she said she knew nothing about reports president trump or his associates may have been swept up in routine surveillance, saying, quote, it's not for me to decide who -- or he said, i should say, or how they should do it, but there's a sharp contrast between a few
weeks ago when rice was very public in saying, quote, she didn't have a clue what chairman nunes was talking about, and now we're we find out she's trying to find a friendly way to discuss this, end quote. here's rice's response. i said i did not what reports nunes was referring to when he spoke to the press. i still do not. we have this extra development for you. the top democrat on the house intel committee told cnn they would welcome rice's testimony during their investigation of russian election medaling, quote, if she has pertinent testimony. charlie, if she's speaking on possibilities of leaking information of unmasked names, i would say that's pertinent in any investigation. >> absolutely. there's no question about it. if democrats were not obsessed with this supposed phantom russian connection, this would be a -- you know, a full-blown scandal in both parties. but, you know, the thing i don't get about this, if there's nothing wrong with what she did, i don't know why she lied about
it, because she clearly lied about it. if you listen to the question and answer she gave. the second thing that i don't understand is, that in fact, you know, there's nothing wrong with this, in some ways, is that more terrifying? what we had was a political official who works directly for the president in a -- in an administration actively participating in the spying of -- on a political opponent during an election. that is terrifying. >> harris: eboni, we know before the exit of president obama there was a relaxing of the laws and the rules, if you will, when it comes to what charlie is talking about, being able to disseminate information across the administration. i want your thoughts on that. >> i don't want that i would characterize it as a relaxing of the law, but i would say that the obama administration is going to stick to their narrative. i don't have the facts to disprove it, which is this, that there was a legitimate national security interest that coincided with the spying of then
candidate trump, and that is where we have this from. now to these issues of the legality of susan rice, because everyone is respectfully concerned around that, did she do something illegal? right now we don't have facts to say they did. if it had any intelligence value then indeed it's considered legal. now there's an issue, was it appropriate? that's a different question. >> harris: it's not just the requesting of the unmasking, but the dissemination of the information. that's where i see the legality come in. absolutely all day long that's pertinent to the investigation anybody would be doing. >> i agree, harris, it's pertinent, where you have a less black and white legality question. >> harris: susan rice got on the record with "i didn't leak anything." that's such a critical issue. >> basically charlie is saying there's no explanation for the contradictory statements we're hearing from her. there's calls for her to testify before congress. do you think she'll ultimately be forced to, charlie?
>> i think she will. i think republicans -- there's enough -- republicans call the control. i think they can force her to testify. one thing that i thought was interesting, in her -- her interview with andrea mitchell, her quote was -- a prosecutor friend of mine, very smart, pointed this out to me -- her quote was "i leaked nothing to nobody." what does that mean? >> like "i didn't have sexual relations with that woman." i'm not kidding. the definitiveness of it. susan rice has a long history of lying, getting caught lying. just go back to the benghazi hearings and revisit all that. this is not someone the american public had trust in. there's already a distrust of her, what's coming out of her mouth. what she said on pbs contradicts what shed to andrea mitchell. there's a lot of smoke here, a lot of questions. she didn't do a good job of
clarifying this yesterday. >> harris: i don't want to like semantics, but when she said, "i didn't leak anything" she's using that word deliberately, because that means something was done i don't remember. >> the relaxing of the laws that i mentioned, we'll maybe get into that on a different day, because we need to talk about what the obama administration did on its way out the door. charles krauthammer is not caught up in semantics or mincing words. >> she's not an investigator. she's a political operative. she works on behalf of the president. if it can be shown that this was a political fishing expedition, then she's in a world of hurt. >> harris: a world of hurt, charlie hurt. come on, i can't resist. >> not to be redundant, but charles krauthammer is right. you know, it is interesting that
it always seems like -- susan rice comes up with political situations. the trouble she got into about benghazi she was spinning something politically not true -- >> harris: about the acts of terror and the killing of our people, the assassination of our people. >> and she blamed it on the video, which was not true. that led to all sorts of other riots after the fact, which led to people being killed around the world. so she's always at the center of political things. >> senator tom cotton called her the typhoid mary of the obama administration, which accurately describes it. for whatever reason she's in the middle of every scandal. like i said earlier, i have an innate distrust of this woman because of what happened with benghazi, and i think most americans do. she better be careful going forward, because sitting here, i don't have clout believing what came out of her mouth on andrea mitchell. >> harris: the roles of distruth with this particular individual comes in to question.
is the fallback, i'm not going to tell the whole story. that's clouding the issue here. maybe it would be to her benefit to volunteer to talk. >> sure. credibility is the heart of everything, in politics, and especially in washington, talking about things so vitally important like our espionage capabilities or the benghazi -- >> harris: last word to you. >> i wouldn't hold my breath, guys. i don't expect anything other than a fifth amendment plea, if indeed she goes on the hill for these conferences. if she does, to your point, meghan, she might be a bit of a martyr for the obama administration, willingly taking on that suspicion on behalf of the administration. >> she did with syria, the red line, so many other things playing out in the news now. as you just brought out, the videotape with the assassination of our people in benghazi. >> she is not going to change that now. i highly doubt it. >> harris: interesting. i always ask, when people are martyrs, what's in for them? one of the america's most
prominent newspapers extending its scathing editorials called "the problem presiden with prest trump." are they going too far? and why is it looking more and more that the senate will go nuclear over the nomination of supreme court nominee neil gorsuch? >> there's a reason they call it the nuclear option. that is that there's fallout.
managing blood sugar is not a marathon it's a series of smart choices. like using glucerna to replace one meal or snack a day. glucerna products have up to 15 grams of protein to help manage hunger and carbsteady, unique blends of slow release carbs to help minimize blood sugar spikes. every meal every craving. it's the choices you make when managing blood sugar that are the real victories. glucerna. everyday progress. that goes beyond assuming beingredients are safe...ood to knowing they are. going beyond expectations... because our pets deserve it. beyond. natural pet food. this is pete's yard. and it's been withered by winter. but all pete needs is scotts turf builder lawn food. it's the fast and easy way to a thick green lawn. it takes grass from hungry - to healthy.
whoo! boom baby! rated pg-13. [ screams ] >> harris: the president meeting with jordan's king abdullah in the white house, meeting in the oval office. we're awaiting comments to come out of there. we know that king abdullah was asked about the happenings in the middle east. president trump blaming the obama administration's weakness for the chemical attack on tuesday. at least 100 people were killed and as many 500 others hurt, including women and children. u.s. ambassador to the u.n., nikki haley, condemning the attack, and assad's horrific attacks on his own people. >> the gas that fell out of the sky yesterday was more deadly,
leaving men, women, the elderly, and children gasping for their very last breath. as first responders, doctors and nurses, rushed to help the victims, a second round of bombs rained down. they died in the same slow horrendous manner as the civilians they were trying to save. >> harris: the president releasing a statement, saying, quote, these heinous actions by the bashar al-assad regime are a consequence of the past administration's weakness and irresolution. president obama said in 2012 he would establish a red line against the use of chemical weapons and then did nothing. nancy pelosi firing back, putting the blame on the current administration, saying this "while president trump cozies up to atv, and the russians, children and civilians have once
again been gassed in syria." this story is unbelievably difficult to cover, the images, the words you heard from nikki haley at the u.n. charlie, we know that the president is meeting with the king of jordan at the white house right now. there's a conversation that was had there. it's tough. >> yeah. it's a reminder of what a powder keg that whole region is right now. i realize that it's not a time for political finger-pointing, but president trump is right about one thing. you know, the reason -- he couldn't enforce his red line. the reason we've had so many problems doing something over there is because president obama did not want to offend iran, mess up the holy grail, getting a, quote, unquote, deal with iran. you know, the chickens are coming home to roost now. >> sandra, you just mentioned that the president is coming up in this dual picture in the oval office, this video. we'll get to that in a second. it's interesting, because in his
own words president trump has recently said, you know, he might consider backing off and leaving bashar al-assad in place. the script is probably changing before our eyes. some indications of that, steve bannon, controversy of him from the white house joining the national security council, reports now that the president 8 remove him. he's reorganizing the nsc. could be a reaction or reflection of what is ahead of this. i mean, the conscience of humanity is challenged now as we look at those pictures. we've seen them time and time again from a civil war going on so long in syria. >> i'm going to break who here, because they are talking at the white house right now. jordan's king abdullah meeting with president trump. just moments ago here's what was said. watch. >> i just want to thank our friends, our great friends. these are very troubled times in
the middle east. we see what happened just recently yesterday in syria. horrible. horrible thing. unspeakable. but i want to thank you both very much for being at the white house. we'll have some interesting discussions today. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> okay. thank you very much. >> the chemical attacks, do you plan to take any action? >> terrible, i can tell you, terrible. you'll see. >> that's president trump, as you just heard him calling the
chemical attacks in syria unspeakable. he was just asked at the end there if there will be a change to syria policy. he said, "we'll see," was just what came out of the outside. troubled times in the middle east he led with, but commenting specifically on the chemical attacks, calling them unspeakable, meeting with the king of order, abdullah. what did you make of the president's words there? >> as we said before, the seriousness of the situation cannot be overstated. going back to what you said a minute ago, harris, this does shock the conscience of humanity, there's no doubt, but i'm reminded of another time when the conscience of humanity was shock, and that was after 9/11. i will never, never again approach the idea of intervening in any situation without -- you know, without remembering that we have politicians in washington who make these decisions, and they care more about politics in so many situations, and they did in that case, and they did it until they changed their mind, and then they retreated.
that's a very -- that's terrifying. >> what's interesting about the timeline on the minds changing, it's very seldom that things rock us. >> i need to jump in here. first of all, nancy pelosi, get your party in line. give me a break. this heinous hellhole that is spiraling out of control happened under president obama. this moment for president trump -- we may disagree on this, charlie, but i believe that america has a responsibility to do something. >> he's come out and talked about leaving bashar al-assad in office essentially. >> right now. >> i cannot -- anyone should get on twitter and look at what's happening to babies getting their skin burned off by chemical weapons at the moment. we have a responsibility to do something. >> what do you want president trump to do? >> send in aid, commit to the removal of bashar al-assad, stop being okay with the fact that russia is aiding and abet, and bombing hospitals in aleppo.
i truly believe this is going to be this generation's holocaust. sitting back, playing politics, all the blaming you're talking about, especially with nancy pelosi, gabbert, it's a shame and embarrassment, and the legacy of this your children will feel forever. >> that's across two presidents, president obama and president trump. shocking the conscience of humanity has to do with not just seeing the pictures and video, but understanding what's playing out, the slow role of isis being built up behind the wall of this civil war. >> president trump has a moment now to be a true global leader in the legacy of ronald reagan, to go back to american exceptionalism, to go to the fact these are people that are helpless. rex tillerson saying the syrians will be in charge of their future. i'm sorry, if you're being chemically gassed, women and children, that you don't have control over your future right now. all the politics that everyone is talking about, the world is spiraling out of control and we're sitting back and watching
it on twitter. >> i pray to god that you're right on this, because ultimately that would be a different shift and departure from what president trump has said up until now. for two years, he tweeted it's a serious problem, we should stay out of it, so much so that he deviated from vice president pence on this very issue. i pray you're right for america and the world. >> to be clear what we just heard come out of the white house, when he was asked if this latest attack will lead to policy change, he said, "you'll see." >> i would rather stay out completely than get in and have a bunch of politicians bail. >> exactly. and make it worse, even more dangerous, if that's even possible. >> he should send in aid, though. > >> guys, we got to go. one step closer to going nuclear over judge neil gorsuch nomination. and president trump potentially making his first public comments on the susan rice unmasking
controversy. now andrea mitchell slammed for being a p.r. person for the democrats. we debate. aleve with direct therapy tens device, a relief from lower back pain. i put it on my back. i feel this electrical pulse grabbing at my muscles. it was more powerful than i was expecting it to be. it worked. i believe aleve. learn more and read reviews at aleve.com. hi dad. no. edon't try to get up. hi, i'm julie, a right at home caregiver. and if i'd been caring for tom's dad, i would have noticed some dizziness that could lead to balance issues. that's because i'm trained to report any changes in behavior, no matter how small, so tom could have peace of mind.
>> fox news alert. we're awaiting president trump's news conference with the king of jordan, and if reporters ask mr. trump could comment for the first time on reports that president trump's national security advisor susan rice requested the unmasking of trump transition officials. we'll bring that to you live as it happens. dan scavino blasting andrea mitchell for her interview with rice yesterday, tweeting she's trying to help get susan rice through this interview with credibility, and she lied during her interview with dem p.r.
person andrea mitchell. what did you make it? >> despite her efforts to make an easy landing for her, i felt susan rice did a terrible job, didn't help herself anne. going back to something you said earlier, eboni, she probably will plead the fifth, but i certainly hope that republicans do manage to call -- >> how do you plead the fifth when you're giving interviews? i'm so confused about this. i don't mean legally how do you plead the fifth? i mean you put this information out, then you don't want to go on record with the american people's elected officials. i'm not saying you can't do it, or why would you do it? >> can i ask a follow-up, harris? what does she lose at this point? she's already out of the administration. >> she's covering for very powerful people. >> a clip from "hardball" last night where they bring race and
gender into the conversation. >> lucky us. >> by looking for a pinata, they found one in susan rice. >> notice how it's always a female. >> that's true. >> basically they're defaming her because she's a woman, maybe because she's a black woman, they didn't like her during benghazi. >> you've got to be kidding me! i hadn't seen that audio. because she's a black woman. that's crazy! >> as a woman, nothing infuriates me more, "as a woman" and -- >> so she can't get to the truth because she's black and a woman? you can't be serious. >> i don't know what the motivations for that "black woman" illusion is, but it undermines me as a black woman. are we less capable, less accountable and credible than
others? >> that's crazy. >> beyond race and gender, the way that was ended, maybe because they didn't like her during benghazi, to belittle what happened there, by making that kind of statement. >> nothing like a bunch of -- no disrespect, charlie, but older white men sitting around talking about the experience of being a woman. >> and a black woman. i mean, come on. >> it does show how delusional these people are. she is becoming a heroine, even though any logical person would be like this is crazy, you're not telling the truth, this doesn't make sense. these people don't care. they would think it's perfectly acceptable to have an entire spying operation if it undermines the trump presidency. >> if you follow the course of that conversation about the
protected groups of people that susan rice can check the box of, did she need to hire somebody by proxy where she could tell the truth? they don't want to go after her? does she need to hire a stand-in? what do they call that in baseball? pinch hitter? >> she's a powerful hitter. she was in the job she was fully capable of doing it, and she has to stand here and take responsibility for that. gender and race have nothing to do with the fact that she may have or may have not leaked information about president trump. bringing it to that area is what people hate about identity politics. >> susan rice has committed to this thing full throttle, for better or for worse, for her credibility or better the obama administration. i don't expect we'll hear anything more about it. what does sheff to lose? nothing. she feels she has nothing to loser. >> former members of the information, what we caulcrick contests, you don't see anybody
coming out with her being on that stage. >> did noticed she's female. >> the eyeliner gave it away. thank you. >> it belittles woma women in p. it's about national security, but also how about men talk about women in any position of power in the media. i don't understand how her gender or race has anything to do how she may have lied on pbs and tried to cover it up with andrea mitchell. >> where is president obama? >> you don't have any former members of the administration coming out and -- >> he's been confused of committing a constitutional crisis, spying on political enemies, and we get nothing. >> i agree with eboni, what does he gain about breaking his silence? can't improve his silence with words? >> she's taking all the heat for him. >> also he's writing a book right now. he's in tahiti bringing a book
right now. i mean, listen -- >> i love tahiti. i love it. >> yes, 100%. okay. well, i don't know, the trump administration reportedly considering some big changes to keep our country safe, including having some visitors turn over their cellphone contacts and social media passwords. whether that's a good idea or could it face big protests? and we are awaiting a joint news conference from president trump and the jordanian king. mr. trump could comment on the susan rice unmasking scandal for the first time. we'll bring that to you as soon as it happens. remember when you said men are superior drivers? yeah... yeah, then how'd i get this... ...allstate safe driving bonus check? ...only allstate sends you a bonus check for every six months you're accident free. silence. it's good to be in, good hands.
about the susan rice unmasking controversy. that of course would be big news. we're awaiting the news conference. we will bring it to you live when it begins. >> while this travel ban languishes in the courts president trump might take other steps to keep america safe. the "wall street journal" is reporting on some of those changes that his administration is considering, including forcing foreign visitors to turn over their cellphone contacts, their social media passwords, and answering questions about their ideology all before they're let into our country. the paper is saying the changes could even apply to america's closest allies, like the uk, japan and australia, but homeland security secretary john kelly played down the report at a senate homeland security hearing today. >> very small members, that we will go to those -- very small numbers. i'm talking right now about at our airports and ports of entry. we'll go in that direction when the professionals at the counter
decide that there's a reason to go in that direction. but the vast majority of people will not be questioned in that way. we don't go into their luggage and inspect their luggage. it's the same kind of thing. we will do it when we think there's a reason to do it. >> all right. charlie, is this the secretary getting in front of the legal challenges that will probably arise from this type of extreme vetting or is this just the administration playing kind of both sides of this? they're being concerned with the vetting issue, and most americans believe that. while the bans make their way through the courts, this is another way to play it. >> i think that's exactly right. i think that it reveals obviously a change in direction from u.s. policy. you know, we can debate the effectiveness of some of these things, the effectiveness of searching people's social media, things like that, but the idea that people coming into our country have, you know, privacy rights, our rights don't apply to people from other countries.
that's, i think, a very good -- a good new thing. then the other notion that, you know, the idea that we are now looking at people coming into this country in terms of does it advantage us? does it disadvantage us? as opposed to just worrying about solving other people's problems. all that is, i think, why donald trump got elected. >> meghan, let me ask you this. charlie makes a good point here, but it works both ways. potentially are concerned if we start doing this to outsiders, when we travel we'll be subjected to this too. does that part concern you? >> yes. i have a lot of concern with all of this. there's a wall street fro quoten rodriguez saying the bad guys showing up with a clean phone. i have a 22-year-old sister keeping text messages off her phone. it's actually not that difficult. with all of this, i'm concerned about what is keeping america safe, what is just giving me the illusion of safety? >> i'm worried what happens with
all that information after we collect it? that's a big responsibility as well. >> what about this, harris, we think about san bernardino, it's homegrown. this doesn't get us closer to solving that issue. >> well, that's made easier by the fact that on the internet, as meghan is pointing out, most of the people among us, under the age of 25, can figure out how to set up black sites for these guys, staying off the grid. sean spicer, turn in your phones, get the encrypted apps off your phones. if we can figure that sort of thing out without the help of a genius at the genius bar at the apple store, imagine what they can do with a genius. >> it's not that hard to scrape your phone. >> a black site is hard to set up. >> i just think you have to listen to the quote from the person, leon rodriguez, who knows. i agree with you, charlie, this argument that somehow people that don't live in this country
have the same rights as people that already live here, i agree with you, and people coming at it by a civil liberties perspective that's -- >> i wish the quote applied to what tsa does every time we go into the airport. i don't feel safer because i take my belt or shoes off. i would rather they institute smarter, you know, strategies for pinpointing the people that are going to hurt us. >> that's a great point. >> you know, going through an old lady's hair is not -- you know, that's not going to -- that doesn't make me feel safer. >> i don't know. this has room for error. you hand over your social media passwords, you enter the country, change them the next day. i don't know how effective this would be. >> i think there's a lot of questions and concerns as we continue to have this debate about balancing privacy rights and making us safer. >> what are you going to do with this sentencings? we have an investigation about information that got scooped up by the trump transition team, how the names were unmasked, and
that stuff got leaked. if somebody is scooping up all that information, it's the old edward snowden talk we had. if they scoop up so much, who gets to decide what happens to the stuff they say they don't need. >> could give us more risks than rewards. the "l.a. times" extending its scathing anti-trump series branding the president trump a train wreck. has the mainstream media gone too far? and we continue to await a joint news conference from the white house where president trump could comment on the susan rice unmasking controversy for the first time. we'll bring you that as soon as it begins. stay with us.
if you're approaching 65, now's the time to get your ducks in a row. to learn about medicare, and the options you have. you see, medicare doesn't cover everything - only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so if 65 is around the corner, think about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. so don't wait. call to request your free decision guide. and gather the information now to help you choose a plan later. these types of plans let you pick any doctor
>> more "outnumbered" in just a moment, but first jon scott has what's coming up in the second hour of "happening now." jon? >> next hour, we could get major developments in a new plan for peace in the middle east as we await a joint news conference at the white house with president trump and jordan's king abdullah. plus, more saber-rattling from north korea, launching another missile into the sea of japan. what the white house is now saying about the kim jong-un regime. and quite a story, a good samaritan who risks his own life, jumping on to subway tracks to save a complete stranger. we will show you the video and talk to this brothe hero live ae
top of the hour. back to you. >> some of the mainstream media taking on president trump's big -- really big -- big league. the "los angeles times" editorial board is cranking out a series "the problem with trump," six parts. today "trump's war on journalism journalism." here's part of today's -- you know what's interesting about that, it's a lot of editorial wrappedup -- i mean,
that was the article right there, just that one little paragraph. >> yeah. meanwhile you have daily developments unraveling, revealing that president obama, his administration, used the highest levels of our espionage services to collect information about political enemies before, during and after. that political enemy won the president, and proceeded to unmask the identities of those people, and those identities leaked to the press. where is the "l.a. times" on that? >> where are democrats on that? i'm curious to ask you. >> i don't think it would be in their political interest to go down that road. they're not going to touch it with a 10-foot pole. president trump has done a lot around his war with the press. journalists, so-called journalists, media personalities have done a lot to aid their own discredit issues, something they
have to be accountable for. >> this is a win for the president, to have it teed up like this -- >> when you have a major news organization trying to tear apart our president. not our political opponent. this isn't an election, a campaign they're trying to tear apart. this is the president of the united states. not obviously, but they should make it clear that they're a biased newspaper rather than putting themselves out there as doing real journalism. >> you're right. this has been so easy for the president to go after the media. >> they just teed it up. >> yeah. i would argue that he won the white house by just destroying the press. as you say, eboni, the press very much put themselves in the position to get destroyed. >> yeah. >> i want to know who the "l.a. times" audience is other than people in los angeles. i mean, do you think those voters -- >> it's interesting that you say that. >> yeah. do you think democrats in wisconsin and pennsylvania are like you know what, i need news on president trump, "l.a. times"
online. it may pop up in twitter feeds, but i think that trump voters and conservatives, there are outlets that i know i can trust, outlets that i know that, okay, i -- >> is everyone like that? >> i think voters are savvy at this point. i think that's why there's an innate distrust of this. i just heard charlie brown's trump's voice. >> the first installation got 2 million viewers, readers. are those people that are just curious? >> 20 million people watch "dancing with the stars." i don't think the stretch of the "l.a. times" is quite -- i mean, maybe i'm wrong, sandra, and you disagree. >> reader reaction, pro and con. let's look at it. in the absence of checks and balances in our current government, the fourth estate is needed more than ever. please continue with your excellent and courageous words. let's flip the switch.
here we go. you should be ashamed of your lack of honesty and partisan behavior, but that would require some honesty. fair and balanced. you had a pro and con. >> yeah, absolutely. i certainly agree that we've never had a time when the fourth estate, so-called fourth estate, has been more important. the federal government is more powerful than it's ever been. but the fourth estate has to question, stand up to the federal government. we very rarely see that. >> what could be happening, i'm sort of joking about this by making up a title, but sort of not, and it piggybacks off what you said eboni, because you have blog spheres that isn't always journalism, but what we encroached on a fourth estate? >> that's what i've been trying to say for the last six months.
those that continue to do the real news, objective news, i don't know if -- to sandra's point -- if all americans are as savvy as meghan is giving them credit for. that's not to disrespect them, but it's a distinction that has to be made, how to make it. >> one of the things when you read this article -- just the little clip that we had -- is that, yes, it's opinion, i get that, but it's dripping with opinion. it's dripping with negativity. that should be a cue to the reader right there nothing is 100% one way or the other, as meghan has often said, if you're outraged about everything, what are you really outraged about? >> i would agree. consumers and readers are a lot more sophisticated than certainly the media gives them credit for, but still it's our responsibility to make clear, you know, that this is opinion or this is journalism. you know, they don't do that. >> talking peace in the middle east. what can come in that part of the world. we have our own president and
president of jordan abdullah, or i should say king of jordan, abdullah, with a news conference coming up at any moment now. we could hear also the president talk about the susan rice situation, the unmasking of names, and her declaration that she did not leak anything. she said she leaked nothing. that would be the first time since those remarks have been spoken that we would hear from our own president on that potentially. we're watching for this to happen, the dual news conference. as it does, we'll bring it to you live on fnc, for the cool kids. stay close. you don't let anything
speak of the meeting between president trump and the king of jordan has been going on for about 45 minutes or so. you saw at the top of this hour we brought you the traditional oval office look at the two men ahead of their meeting and then traditionally they will do a dual news conference. right here on fox news channel, we will bring you back. we want to say a special shout out and thank you to charlie who came here today. it has been released since january 20th, a lot of political newsprint you've joined us quite a few times and today was another big day. >> always a pleasure, thank you. >> with the fancy tie, i like that. >> i've won a lot of money wearing this. >> that is interesting. this news conference can make big news if he is asked about susan rice because we have yet
to hear the president react. >> that would be the first time, she did say on the record that she did not leak them on masked names of trump team members who are caught up in the federal sweeping grasp of foreign actors. let's go now straight to "happening now" ." >> jon: we begin with a breaking news bombshell from the white house paid fox news confirms president trump's chief strategist stephen bannon has been removed from his position on the national security council. it was a controversial move when the president announced it. the fact that the man who is widely credited with helping him win the white house would be put in a position where he was privy to the nation's most sensitive intelligence. he is a former investment banker and the head of breitbart, again widely considered one of the architects of the president's victory. he is a navy veteran, but other than that, holds not typically the kind of credentials that would allow him to